WikiCU talk:Deletion policy - Revision history

Reaganaut: moved Talk:Deletion policy to WikiCU talk:Deletion policy

2013-05-05T00:20:45Z

moved Talk:Deletion policy to WikiCU talk:Deletion policy

Reaganaut: Talk:Deletions moved to Talk:Deletion policy

2007-05-12T17:05:53Z

Talk:Deletions moved to Talk:Deletion policy

Reaganaut at 04:43, 3 May 2007

2007-05-03T04:43:45Z

Stephen.wang at 01:58, 3 May 2007

2007-05-03T01:58:07Z

Reaganaut at 23:24, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T23:24:15Z

Nonsensical: /* Voting procedure */

2007-05-02T23:16:28Z

‎Voting procedure

Reaganaut at 23:06, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T23:06:56Z

Nonsensical: New page: Can we come up with a rule on when it's okay to take action on an article that's been nominated for deletion/move? I propose action can be taken 7 days after the nomination if a majority o...

2007-05-02T22:36:54Z

New page: Can we come up with a rule on when it's okay to take action on an article that's been nominated for deletion/move? I propose action can be taken 7 days after the nomination if a majority o...

New page

Can we come up with a rule on when it's okay to take action on an article that's been nominated for deletion/move? I propose action can be taken 7 days after the nomination if a majority of the voters on the talk page agree. [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 18:36, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 :::* Yes, I think if 75% agree it should be deleted, there's no need to keep the talk page. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 :::*75% of active users? Let's be honest, our users aren't that active, no article is every going to get deleted, especially since there are like 15 sysops. I say at least 75% of voters after 7 days.
 == Appeals ==
 * We can write an appeals policy as soon as there's a need. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 ::* So delete the article and the talk page? [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 19:16, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 :::* Yes, I think if 75% agree it should be deleted, there's no need to keep the talk page. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 == Appeals ==
 * We can write an appeals policy as soon as there's a need. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 :{{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 ::* So delete the article and the talk page? [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 19:16, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 == Appeals ==
 * We can write an appeals policy as soon as there's a need. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 == Voting procedure ==
 * '''75%''' of reputable users (admins and users who have made at least a few contributions) must vote to delete, otherwise we keep the article. Why? Because I think that at this stage, I'd prefer to see growth than perfection. The 75% figure is inspired by the EU's [[w:QMV|qualified majority voting]], but I'd also be open to 66% in line with the US Constitution. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 * After 7 days, any admin (except the one, if any, who proposed the deletion) can use the above criteria and decide whether to keep article or delete it.
 :* If keep, that means remove the deletion tag, rename the deletion discussion saying it is "archived", and noting the result of the deletion discussion.
 :* If delete, well, that's obvious.
 :{{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 == Appeals ==
 * We can write an appeals policy as soon as there's a need. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:06, 2 May 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Can we come up with a rule on when it's okay to take action on an article that's been nominated for deletion/move? I propose action can be taken 7 days after the nomination if a majority of the voters on the talk page agree. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 18:36, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		Can we come up with a rule on when it's okay to take action on an article that's been nominated for deletion/move? I propose action can be taken 7 days after the nomination if a majority of the voters on the talk page agree. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 18:36, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	:Good idea. Here are the things we need to resolve... {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+
		+	== Time limit ==
		+	* '''7 days''' As per Nonsensical's proposal. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+
		+	== Voting procedure ==
		+	* '''75%''' of reputable users (admins and users who have made at least a few contributions) must vote to delete, otherwise we keep the article. Why? Because I think that at this stage, I'd prefer to see growth than perfection. The 75% figure is inspired by the EU's [[w:QMV\|qualified majority voting]], but I'd also be open to 66% in line with the US Constitution. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+
		+	* After 7 days, any admin (except the one, if any, who proposed the deletion) can use the above criteria and decide whether to keep article or delete it.
		+	:* If keep, that means remove the deletion tag, rename the deletion discussion saying it is "archived", and noting the result of the deletion discussion.
		+	:* If delete, well, that's obvious.
		+	:{{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+
		+	== Appeals ==
		+	* We can write an appeals policy as soon as there's a need. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision	Revision as of 00:20, 5 May 2013
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 17:05, 12 May 2007
(No difference)